Keep up-to-date with drugs and crime

The latest research, policy, practice and opinion on our criminal justice and drug & alcohol treatment systems
Search
Drug testing and Incentivised Substance Free Living wings
Research into the lived experience of drug testing and Incentivised Substance Free Living wings (ISFLs) in three prisons

ISFLs

Earlier this month (5 December 2024), the MoJ published research into drug testing and Incentivised Substance Free Living wings (ISFLs) in three prisons. The research was conducted by RAND Europe with support from Rosie Meek, Kirsty Hudson, Sarah Senker and Charlotte Scott. As many readers will know:

Mandatory drug testing is routinely conducted in prisons to monitor drug trends, deter drug consumption (through sanctions), and identify individuals in need of further support.

ISFLs are dedicated wings for prisoners who want to live in a drug-free environment, whether that be free from the consumption of drugs, the violence related to drugs, or the culture of drug use. 

The research

The study was based on interviews and focus groups with prisoners, interviews with prison staff, and observations of drug testing suites and ISFL wings. Fieldwork took place in March and April 2023 in three prisons: a category C men’s prison in the North of England; a category B/C men’s prison in Wales; and a closed women’s prison in the South of England.

The findings are very mixed and reveal many of the challenges of delivering effective drug free wings in the current prison estate.

Drug testing

The study found that drug testing regimens appear to be designed with limited consideration of the variation and uniqueness of each prison and its population. The research identified practical limitations for prisoners on remand or serving short sentences in accessing support services. Female prisoners experienced the process of being tested as degrading due to the different way that they provide a sample in comparison to men.

The illicit use of prescription medication, sourced through the prison’s medication hatch and traded among prisoners, was reported to be prevalent in all three sites. There was no immediate way for prison staff to know whether a positive result was the result of misuse or legitimate prescription use. The process for confirming this, via medical records, was described as lengthy and, at times, inappropriately punitive to prisoners legitimately taking prescription medication. Several staff and prisoners commented that the regimens were testing for substances that were widely understood not to be consumed in the sites.

Drug testing regimens were not always seen to be effective as a therapeutic tool to support prisoners or address underlying needs that drive drug use. Generally, prisoners were either indifferent to, or supportive of, drug testing itself. The punitive responses to positive drug tests were felt to do little to deter drug use, in the absence of support being offered.

Most participants, particularly in the men’s prisons, felt that drug testing was currently ineffective at deterring drug use in part due to inconsistent implementation. Additionally, for some at the South of England prison the ‘benefit’ of taking drugs to help deal with mental health issues and prison life, outweighed the ‘cost’ of getting caught.

ISFLs

There were mixed perceptions about the value of ISFL across the prison population. In the North of England and Welsh prisons, staff and prisoners were generally positive about the operation of the ISFL and attributed this to a calm atmosphere, positive and supportive relationships with staff and other prisoners, extended time out of cells and additional support services to help prisoners address their mental health needs. At the South of England prison, the ISFL was struggling to differentiate itself from other wings which staff and prisoners attributed to a lack of incentives specific to the ISFL. ISFLs were described by both staff and prisoners as having ‘a bad rep’ and creating ‘ill feeling’ among prisoners on other wings. This was put down to jealousy and resentment about the additional privileges and a perception that prisoners on ISFLs were colluding with management.

ISFL referral processes varied significantly but the main finding was that the process for being able to reside on the wing appeared to be ad hoc was also unclear to many prisoners.

Approaches to dealing with positive drug test results from ISFL residents also differed. In the North of England prison, a ‘two strikes’ approach to excluding prisoners from the wing appeared to be implemented consistently, while in the Welsh prison there was more flexibility for prisoners who volunteered information that they had used drugs. In the South of England prison no such penalty was applied.

Talking therapies and purposeful activities were important in supporting recovery. The peer-led component of therapies and the opportunities to build supportive relationships with other residents through additional time out of cells and in shared spaces was felt to be effective in helping prisoners to understand the drivers of their drug use and how to address their mental health needs.

The importance of a stable, safe environment and providing activities tailored to the needs of the population was highlighted by interviewees. Many believed that an ISFL should primarily be a settled environment where prisoners can access help to support their needs, and that a mix of prisoners, with and without histories of drug use, was beneficial in creating this environment. However, the environment in the ISFL at the South of England prison was described as ‘disruptive’ as it included prisoners who had not chosen to be on the ISFL, and other wings were described as offering a more therapeutic, communal environment.

Lessons from the North of England and Welsh prisons point to some unintended negative consequences that must be managed. Managing ill feelings from prisoners in other areas of the prison about the benefits that ISFL residents receive may be a challenge. The risks of creating or increasing disparities in prison experiences needs further consideration. Furthermore, staff and residents on the ISFL may not be well equipped and supported to deal with the traumatic experiences of prisoners that they are exposed to on the ISFL.

Conclusion

Those familiar with both drug testing and drug free wings in prisons are likely to be unsurprised by these findings. While limiting the use of drugs in prison is obviously important, MDT has rarely contributed much of value to this end.

The positive environment needed for an effective drug-free wing inevitably throws into sharp comparison the lack of a decent mainstream environment in most of our prisons in 2024.

Thanks to Andy Aitchison for kind permission to use the header image in this post. You can see Andy’s work here

Share This Post

Related posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Prison posts are sponsored by Unilink

 

Excellence through innovation

Unilink, Europe’s provider of Offender/Probation Management Software

Subscribe

Get every blog post by email for free